whether they are in consensus or not will create challenges based on the blocks metadata and challenge those hotspots that are clients of it. I'm curious if CG should be excluded from creating challenges and collecting receipts while in?whether they are in consensus or not will create challenges based on the blocks metadata and challenge those hotspots that are clients of it. I'm curious if CG should be excluded from creating challenges and collecting receipts while in? poc_timeout is, however, that CG member may no longer be in consensus and still be serving as the Challenger.
2What if all the validator operators choose not to offer that since it is extra cost to them without any compensation?
If the light hotspots do not get challenged anymore, the whole blockchain becomes useless as well as the HNT coin. So it would impact the validators badly tooWhat if all the validator operators choose not to offer that since it is extra cost to them without any compensation?
If the light hotspots do not get challenged anymore, the whole blockchain becomes useless as well as the HNT coin. So it would impact the validators badly too
1
2deny validators... it's to allow more than validators to be able to do this simple part of the pocdeny validators... it's to allow more than validators to be able to do this simple part of the poc poc challengers or themselves to further expand their compute and knock out blocks at a time
1
1
1blockchain-challenger and anyone should be able to run one. You have to stake some amount of HNT to be a part of itblockchain-challenger and anyone should be able to run one. You have to stake some amount of HNT to be a part of it blockchain-challenger and anyone should be able to run one. You have to stake some amount of HNT to be a part of it
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
1We are planning to add a voting mechanism to vote with the pool wallet but that is not implemented yet and don't know how many times we will agree on a vote as we will need to reach to 80-90% agreement to vote in one direction Helium-Staking (edited)

1
1
1

1


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
error] <0.10159.41>@mine#6183r_onion_server:send_witness:{207,5} failed to send witness, max retryerror] <0.10159.41>@mine#6183r_onion_server:send_witness:{207,5} failed to send witness, max retry
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1Sync issues, all relayed states, port forwarding or firewall issues, and SD card failures due to excessive load will be eliminated. Hotspot bandwidth consumption will be a fraction of what it is today. This may also reduce the cost of Hotspot hardware, as processing and storage needs will be greatly decreased.
HIP55 is a way to light hotspot.
I do not think it is good to say incorrect things ...
2
1
1
1
1
1
1I think one thing that they can do, is instead of giving validators the rewards for challenges, they should let hotspot owners volunteer to also run their hotspots on the tesnet, and get rewards that originally came from the challenges for helping test things on it (or maybe mappers) (edited)missing BBA I need to upgrade my disk." In fact, it appears some penalties just happen randomly and the dev team as said that this is expected. (edited)

no biggy money where our opinion is ^^ (edited)Estimate price is about $150~$200 for HP0C depends on IC cost, price exclude Helium License.Estimate price is about $150~$200 for HP0C depends on IC cost, price exclude Helium License.
1
1
1
12500000*0.009/(586768*0.768) = 0.05 HNT (takes into account offline hotspots).
1
1
1
3
1
1

0.9% of 2500000 HNT = 22500 HNT per month / ~587,000 = 0.03833049403 HNT per hotspot per month / 30 = 0.00127768313 HNT per hotspot per day0.9% of 2500000 HNT = 22500 HNT per month / ~587,000 = 0.03833049403 HNT per hotspot per month / 30 = 0.00127768313 HNT per hotspot per day 0.00127768313 HNT per hotspot per day * 365 = 0.46635434245 HNT per hotspot per year0.9% of 2500000 HNT = 22500 HNT per month / ~587,000 = 0.03833049403 HNT per hotspot per month / 30 = 0.00127768313 HNT per hotspot per day 0.00127768313 HNT per hotspot per day * 365 = 0.46635434245 HNT per hotspot per year .1 HNT a day
2
2
3
1
relayed hotspot... yet this one is not relayed. HIP55 makes all the ones like this, AND relayed challengers, go away!relayed hotspots.. its a whole different story when you remove the ones that arent relayed from the equation, that are also sliding under the radar, like the one i postedrelayed|non-relayed|firewalled in some weird way|legit hardware issues| network issues blah blah blah... the list goes on in terms of stability of devices responsible for challenges and getting the receipts delivered in a timely manor
1
1
1add_gateway fee being implemented as a source of friction to prevent someone from spamming a ton of gateways to the blockchain that don't exist. I think the lower we go with this the more it would be lucrative to do just that. Now, thinking of it as a stake I'd have to take Tim's point of view. It's currently a transaction fee (if ETH gas can be justified to be claimed on taxes as an expense so should this fwiw). However, I'm all about performance based initiatives. What if you did "stake" $50 but over the course of some performance metric you're rewarded back 90% ... 100% of it back? It'd meet the current goal of limiting spoof gateways and the user could use it in the future for more miners or just back into their pockets.
Only downside to this is that the current HNT -> DC burn is gateway fees. Remove that and the network would only see the ~$2000 a month data transfer. Also what would you do with the hotspots currently on chain. Would they be returned this fee or would people be okay with future installations working this way?
The last question also applies with the change of $50 to $10 for light hotspots since older gateways paid more to join the network how is that fair?mode is set as light. if it's not, we'll take a look.mode is set as light. if it's not, we'll take a look. add_gateway fee being implemented as a source of friction to prevent someone from spamming a ton of gateways to the blockchain that don't exist. I think the lower we go with this the more it would be lucrative to do just that. Now, thinking of it as a stake I'd have to take Tim's point of view. It's currently a transaction fee (if ETH gas can be justified to be claimed on taxes as an expense so should this fwiw). However, I'm all about performance based initiatives. What if you did "stake" $50 but over the course of some performance metric you're rewarded back 90% ... 100% of it back? It'd meet the current goal of limiting spoof gateways and the user could use it in the future for more miners or just back into their pockets.
Only downside to this is that the current HNT -> DC burn is gateway fees. Remove that and the network would only see the ~$2000 a month data transfer. Also what would you do with the hotspots currently on chain. Would they be returned this fee or would people be okay with future installations working this way?
The last question also applies with the change of $50 to $10 for light hotspots since older gateways paid more to join the network how is that fair?
5
1The first of many changes..
You'll know when we transition all Hotspots to Light Hotspots. it will be a BigDeal ™️


1
1
1
That's a difficult topic.
Instead, I gave you the things that HIP-55 changes, I do not know if India as a whole or you specifically will earn more, less, or the same because of HIP-55. (edited)
2
1
2poc_challenge_rate with poc_challege_interval. They are not the same (edited)poc_challenge_rate with poc_challege_interval. They are not the same (edited)
miner eval blockchain_ledger_v1:config(<<"poc_interval">>, blockchain:ledger(blockchain_worker:blockchain())).
{error, not_found}
miner eval blockchain_ledger_v1:config(<<"poc_rate">>, blockchain:ledger(blockchain_worker:blockchain())).
{error, not_found}
miner eval blockchain_ledger_v1:config(<<"poc_interval">>, blockchain:ledger(blockchain_worker:blockchain())).
{error, not_found}
miner eval blockchain_ledger_v1:config(<<"poc_rate">>, blockchain:ledger(blockchain_worker:blockchain())).
{error, not_found} miner eval blockchain_ledger_v1:config(<<"poc_challenge_interval">>, blockchain:ledger(blockchain_worker:blockchain())).
{ok, 950}

Note that at this time, all Hotspots will still sync the blockchain and we do not expect bandwidth requirements to lower immediately post-activation.2022-05-11 15:48:00.181 1 [info] <0.31202.1>@miner_poc_grpc_client_statem:setup:{201,13} *** connecting to validator with ip: "xxx", port: 8080, addr: "/p2p/xxx"
3@miner_poc_grpc_client_statem:find_validator:{438,21} request to validator failed: {error,req_failed} (edited)
2